TorontoÕs bid to purchase
the Green Lane landfill near London has pushed the great garbage debate to a
new level of hysteria. London Councillor Susan Eagle is calling for tollbooths
to be installed on area roads to stop the trash trucks from invading her
neighborhood. London Mayor Anne Marie DeCicco-Best has asked the province for a
provincial strategy on waste management and protection for potential hosts
sites.

Meanwhile in Toronto,
Councillor Jane Pitfield, who is chasing David Miller for the mayorÕs chair, is
promoting incineration as a solution to the cityÕs garbage woes. Miller, who so
far is against incineration, is defending the Green Lane purchase as a solution
to TorontoÕs 20-year quest to find a place to dump its garbage.

With all due respect to the
mayor and his predecessors, if they havenÕt found a solution in twenty years,
maybe itÕs time to re-think the process? I may be stating the obvious here, but
after two decades of terrorizing its neighbours, perhaps itÕs time somebody
pointed out that Toronto might just be looking in the wrong direction.

LetÕs put some perspective
on this. In the same time that it took to fight World War I and II –
twice – Toronto is still fighting with its neighbours over garbage. As
any community that has found itself in TorontoÕs potential dump list will
testify, fighting CanadaÕs largest urban bully is a lot like fighting a war.
Battle plans are drawn, activists are exhausted, and local coffers are drained
rallying a defense. In the end, Toronto is still looking to dump its trash
anywhere but home.

There are alternatives, and
IÕm not talking incineration, either. Contrary to public perception, burning
garbage isnÕt a cheap way to generate electricity; itÕs a very expensive way to
minimize the amount of garbage that still has to be disposed of. Incinerators
still require landfills, and toxic ones at that, to house the remaining ash
(typically 20 percent by weight and 10 percent by volume). They also compete
with beneficial recycling programs for paper and plastics, which are a
necessary part of the fuel mix. Both are critical for maximizing burning
temperatures and minimizing stack emissions.

The NIMBY (not in my
backyard) factor should also beware. Any community that opts for an incinerator
will likely find itself importing garbage from other communities to help keep
the home fires burning, so to speak.

So burning isnÕt the answer.
Neither is dumping on your neighbors. Ultimately, the solution is to not make
the stuff in the first place. But until we have a major ideological shift in
our values and recognize that we are literally wasting our resource base, we
need an interim solution.

That solution is to embrace
our waste as a resource and treat it accordingly. It can be done, very
successfully.Edmonton started
looking for a new landfill site just about the same time that Toronto did back
in the 1980s. Much like Toronto, Edmonton is surrounded by numerous communities
that were unwilling to play host to the cityÕs garbage. So instead of trying to
push it on them anyway, Edmonton saw its failure to find an acceptable landfill
as an opportunity to re-examine how they were doing things.

In 1994 its integrated waste management system was approved with a goal of Òdeveloping a system that was equitable for
all residents, regardless of income or social status, instill public awareness
of the long-term benefits of reducing waste generation and of reusing and
recycling waste, and build up the Province of Alberta's environmental industry
and knowledge base by creating an unparalleled environment for applied research
and learning.Ó Oh, and achieve a 70 percent waste diversion rate.

ÒWeÕre not quite
there yet,Ó said Connie Boyce, Director
of Strategic Planning and Community Relations. ÒWe
are currently diverting 15 percent through recycling and 35 to 45 percent is
diverting through our central composting facility,Ó ThatÕs still an impressive
50 to 60 percent diversion rate, which coincidentally has been OntarioÕs
long-term and thus far unattainable goal for years. For Edmonton, this is just
a starting point.

ÒOur
long term goal is 95 percent diversion,Ó said Boyce. City engineers are
currently looking at gasification to convert a residual waste into a synthetic
gas that can be burned for energy. ItÕs important to note that gasification is
not incineration.

Edmonton isnÕt
alone. Halifax and Prince Edward Island also have remarkably progressive,
successful waste management strategies. (But more about that in future
columns.) The question is, if they can do it, why canÕt Toronto? If I were a
Toronto resident, thatÕs the question IÕd be asking political hopefuls if they
came knocking at my door.